Re: Recently on a.r.e - plagiarism
- Yes, Doug Marman is as much of a twit as Twitch!
On thetruthseeker.com site 2/8/2004 Marman responds to questions by
Joey Ward by saying,
"I don't do yes or no questions, but I will try to keep my answers
short:... 3. Did Paul Twitchell copy other writers works? Yes. Well,
I guess I can give yes or no answers sometimes. 4. Did Paul
Twitchell use other writers words and put his Eck masters names on
them as if the Eck Master were saying them? Yes. 5. Who do you Trust
to tell the truth about Spiritual truths? Pick one only. [Names
omitted] I see all teachings as mines. The good ones are gold mines,
but they all need to be sorted through to find the pure gold. I have
found no outer teachings that are pure gold."
In that same long winded post Marman responds to others. Here he
responds to Nacal by saying, "You wrote, 'The sad thing is that
there is no freedom in religion... there is only control through the
use of fear and surrender of the common sense of having an open
mind, and of course, the dangled carrot of initiation and hope.' It
certainly seems that way. To me, without freedom there is no point
to a spiritual teaching. It is simply a social group. There is more
peer presure and more influence from people who want everyone to be
harmonious rather than speaking honestly, than control from above,
but in general I agree with you."
So, in review, it seems that Marman can't even say that the outer
(physical plane) teachings of Eckankar are pure! But, if he had
he would have been contradicting himself (like Klemp does) after his
own admissions about Twitchell's dishonesty.
And, after all, Marman has pointed out, on his own site, that
Twitchell was in "Paris, Kentucky" visiting his step-sister Kay-Dee
while she was at art school and not in "Paris, France." I guess that
her studying with a famous art master, and such, were exaggerations
by Twitch as well! Where did the lies begin and end with Twitchell,
or did they ever end? Actually, the existance of the LEM/Mahanta is
proof that the lies haven't ended!
this is, in my view, an excellent article about plagiarism of Paul
******** quote *******
We are All the Victims Doug
by DarwinTwitchell@[EMAIL PROTECTED] Dec 18, 2005 at 11:09 AM
The whole issue of plagiarism is only about whether Paul should have
put a footnote in his book to show where the passage came from.
Borrowing the passage was not the problem. The only issue is whether
he should have noted where it came from.
Wow, miles of yarn to get to the point. Well, duh. Of course
borrowing passages is not the problem. Passing off the exact hard-
earned words of others as your own has always been the problem.
That's why, in school, the teacher always said about the next
essay, "In your *own* words..."
Paul certainly mentioned Walter Russell and his books as great books
to read, but he didn't mark the exact passages or put footnotes when
he used them. So, who is the victim?
We are the victims, all of Paul Twitchell's readers. He
misrepresented himself. He not only plagiarized extensively, he flat-
out fabricated extensively. As in "made things up". Your
argument "nobody loses" is flat out wrong. We all lose. Look how
much eckankar has lost because of Paul's dishonesty and deceptions.
Think of the hours of your life and my life we've given to this
sorry subject. Like Sisyphus, you keep pushing the big rock of
plagiarism up the hill just to watch it roll down again, usually
right over the top of you. There is no way to spin, to mitigate, to
excuse Paul's lack of attribution, much less his putting Julian
Johnson's words into "rebazar tarzs" mouth. This is premediatated
deception, plain and simple. I know it, you know it and every
teacher in the world knows it. The NY Times knows it. Only a
deluded and impressionable True Believer could be convinced it was
somehow noble of Paul, in his great rush to deliver the great message
that, in between bouts of chasing women, he had to plagiarize freely
and copiously to beat that devil Kal to the finish line.
That dog doesn't hunt Doug and in your guts I think you know it.
You're right Doug, I do disrespect you. I think you are as least as
phony and duplicitous as Paul was, and Darwin and Harold. You all
know Paul's conduct was unacceptable by any righteous standard yet
you all are so emotionally and monetarily invested that you won't
admit it and for decades have kept up the charade that there is
nothing "rotten in Denmark".
Such a man as Paul Twitchell might have inspired Samuel Johnson's
famous piece of sarcasm: "Your manuscript is both good and original;
but the part that is good is not original, and the part that is
original is not good."
The following quote from an article called *The Unoriginal Sin* By
Roy Peter Clark puts, I think, Paul's copious plagiarims and
fabrications into the proper arena. You assisidously try to keep his
transgressions in the technical field. They belong in the field of
human psychology. Paul appears to have been, as Ford Johnson so
eloquently makes the case, suffering from Mythomania and Delusions
of Grandeur, at the very least.
Quote: (See how easy it is to quote Doug?)
"In the most serious cases, plagiarism is a human problem rather
than a technical one. It is practiced by people under duress, people
who act without grace under pressure. Editors need to be sensitive
to those pressures.
Surely the saddest case was that of Emily Ann Fisher, a
reporter/intern at The Washington Post who was a Phi Beta Kappa
graduate of Harvard. In July of 1973, she inserted dialogue from
Catcher in the Rye into a feature story she had written for the
Post. She was fired. Friends say she was a brilliant, deeply
troubled woman who had a photographic memory. No one is sure how
intentional her act was or what emotional pressures led her to
borrow from Salinger. But she later took her life.
Ultimately, it is the plagiarist who suffers most from plagiarism.
This self-inflicted pain was well expressed by a veteran reporter
from the St. Petersburg Times, who in July of 1979 kidnapped about
one-third of a magazine article on credit cards from Changing Times.
On the day of her resignation, she pinned a brave letter to the
newsroom bulletin board: "Twelve years of dedicated journalism down
the drain because of a stupid mistake," she wrote. "I am writing
this public explanation for a selfish reason. It will be easier for
me to live with myself knowing that the truth is known. But I hope
my mistake will serve as a lesson to others. I have let the Times
down. I have let myself down. But most of all, I have let the
profession down. And for that I am truly sorry."
Do you still think nobody gets hurt by plagiarism Doug?
If eckankar is to survive, much less grow, some ekist of character
will have to come along and set the record straight, admit the
truth, close the astral library, and make whatever amends necessary.
Too bad that doesn't appear to be you Doug.
******* Unquote *******